Hiya,
Firstly let me quote from "Tactics and the Experience of Battle in the Age of Napolion" (Rory Muir, Yale University Press, 2000).
"Infantry in formed bodies almost never fought each other with bayonets on open ground: either one side would break before contact was made, or the attack would falter and the troops woulds begin firing while still some yarsd apart" (p86). An excellent book and should be standard reading for all wargamers. Numerous other in-depth studies, first hand accounts and medical research support this fact.
Now I can happily live with the melee attack in the game as it is in regards casualties (I consider them dead, wounded, pow and flee)and outcome, especially in a 15 minute turn.
What I have issue with is, as has been pointed out, the stacking to swamp troops <u>IN THE OPEN</u>. At times smaller steady units were capable of repulsing or at least holding larger numbers becuase of their steadiness and order (often combined with advantagous tactical posn), in the game currently they cannot. No matter what quality.
I am only now getting a good feel for the 10min turn and I find this a big improvement in regards fire, melee and battle flow.[:)]
All close country, build up areas and fortifications did see a lot of hand to hand struggles, thats a given due to the terrain. Yes there were numerous instances of actual hand to hand combat <u>IN THE OPEN</u> but they were not the norm and were brief with limited casualties and with a very quick resolution. One side or other being surprised was usually the case.
Bill I think your examples are cases in poit:
<i>Prussian cavalry swooping down on French infantry which were only just a few seconds ago in road column in 1813.</i>
Just a few seconds ago in road column, thus unprepared and to the attacking cav they had them surprised!
<i>Murat's cavalry charge at Eyalu in a blinding snowstorm into fresh Russian columns.</i>
Into a blinding snowstorm - they were surprised and not aware/ready.
<i>Davout's attack on the Fleche's at Borodino (multiple attacks).</i>
The Fleches are a fortification - different concept and for some reason men will attack a fortification more readily than "cross swords" with steady inf in the open.
<i>I disagree that it was only when units were disordered that melee would take place. Countless examples of the French attacking reverse slope defenders for example.</i>
Again the attackers were surprised and in most cases driven off becuase of it.
Bill your tactical counter though cannot be fualted [8D].
Anton I agree the simple fix would be to see a reduction in hex stacking. See the realities as posted by Clifton Sweeny under the Pyrrhic Victory over Hp systems victory post. Info readily available from dozens of sources.
Colin yes I would like to see the attacker have to test to charge home as well!
So a good fix would be to reduce hex stacking numbers ( don't forget the numbers able to attack into the hex should equate to the target hex not the six surrounding ones! The ) combined with a moral check for both defender (prior to firing) and attackers (if the defenders stand). How possible is that we need to know?
Lt Col Mike Ellwood
Konig Regt
1 Bde, 22 Div
VII Saxon Corps, ADR
|
</center>
</center>